57
57
Feb 15, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 57
favorite 0
quote 0
the sequester and how the pentagon budget will proceed. what's it going to mean between congress and the pentagon once hagel is in charge after they made him go through this? >> if the president thought by having a republican in the cabinet at the pentagon he was going to buy any kind of loyalty or relationship with republican senators, he can think again about that. because this simply isn't happening. chuck hagel is not going to have relationships with people who humiliated him to this degree. secondly, he was weakened by his own poor performance. and whether he was playing rope a dope and this was a tactic to not pick a fight and get in an argument with john mccain and the others on the committee that he would then have to work with, he didn't fight back enough. claire mccaskill and other democrats, claire you saw on our show and other forums saying, look. he clearly is better at asking questions than answering questions. but still came strongly to his defense as did the other democrats on the committee. saying joe manchin and others sa
the sequester and how the pentagon budget will proceed. what's it going to mean between congress and the pentagon once hagel is in charge after they made him go through this? >> if the president thought by having a republican in the cabinet at the pentagon he was going to buy any kind of loyalty or relationship with republican senators, he can think again about that. because this simply isn't happening. chuck hagel is not going to have relationships with people who humiliated him to this...
48
48
Feb 26, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 48
favorite 0
quote 0
>> you would have to talk to somebody other than the pentagon. we don't talk to those operational matters because they don't involve us. yes. >> they don't involve us. you have to talk to somebody -- not here. i refer your questions to other people. i think he is talking about the cia. let's check with the cia then to see how the cia handles these questions at their daily press briefs. all right. they don't do that. and so that's where questions about this policy go to die. this week in addition to the chuck hagel defense secretary nomination, the senate is expected to advance president obama's nominee to head the cia, john brennan. senator john mccain is proposing holding up the nomination of john brennan because, well, john mccain. but even in the midst of that conflict, there is an interesting confluence of opinion right now that something major should be changed in mr. brennan's field of expertise. mr. brennan broached the subject in a "washington post" profile that ran about him last october. the acting director of the cia from whom mr. bren
>> you would have to talk to somebody other than the pentagon. we don't talk to those operational matters because they don't involve us. yes. >> they don't involve us. you have to talk to somebody -- not here. i refer your questions to other people. i think he is talking about the cia. let's check with the cia then to see how the cia handles these questions at their daily press briefs. all right. they don't do that. and so that's where questions about this policy go to die. this...
43
43
Feb 12, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 43
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> those benefits, the pentagon no matter how much they want to, they can't do those things. >> right. >> because they are precluded by law because of doma. >> and secretary panetta and the president, they did all they could under the law. and that's what a lot of people don't understand. here is another story charlie told me. she said when she was doing her live interview, she also went to see her then congressman from new hampshire. and she told her story. and the congressman said oh, but you're okay. you live in new hampshire. you're legally married in new hampshire. that's legal. so you're taken care of. so her congressman didn't even know that her wife was treated as a second class citizen and didn't enjoy the benefits that other military families enjoyed. so if the congressman didn't know, you know, the american public has no idea. so we need to continue telling charlie's story. >> the reason that i wanted to play that particular clip of her lobbying gene shaheen there, gene shaheen obviously somebody who has been very supportive of her. but you see when she tells gene shaheen h
. >> those benefits, the pentagon no matter how much they want to, they can't do those things. >> right. >> because they are precluded by law because of doma. >> and secretary panetta and the president, they did all they could under the law. and that's what a lot of people don't understand. here is another story charlie told me. she said when she was doing her live interview, she also went to see her then congressman from new hampshire. and she told her story. and the...
119
119
Feb 23, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBCW
tv
eye 119
favorite 0
quote 0
the headline news out of brussels today was a very terse statement from the pentagon spokesman. it was kind of strange. he was essentially clarifying, hey, whatever you heard from the germans earlier today, that was not true. this is the statement. the reports that the u.s. told allies that we are considering 8,000 to 12,000 u.s. troops after 2014 are not correct. a range of 8,000 to 12,000 troops was discussed, but it was discussed as the possible size of the overall nato mission, not the u.s. contribution. ah, important clarification. so the defense minister from germany had apparently told reporters that 8 to 12,000 troops was how many troops america was going to keep in afghanistan. everybody thought that was very big news since that's not what we heard hear at home at all. maybe that is how the german guy understood it, but it is apparently not the way that leon panetta meant it. that was the headline out of brussels today. those troops, that's nato combined, that's not just us. that was the headline. the other news of course was that representing the united states and appa
the headline news out of brussels today was a very terse statement from the pentagon spokesman. it was kind of strange. he was essentially clarifying, hey, whatever you heard from the germans earlier today, that was not true. this is the statement. the reports that the u.s. told allies that we are considering 8,000 to 12,000 u.s. troops after 2014 are not correct. a range of 8,000 to 12,000 troops was discussed, but it was discussed as the possible size of the overall nato mission, not the u.s....
61
61
Feb 2, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 61
favorite 0
quote 0
the center of gravity will be with the war machine, will be with the war planners, will be with the pentagon. it is only when the nation views itself as being at peace that diplomacy can take some kind of equal footing. until we get to place where we do something as dramatic as repealing or refusing to reauthorize, the authorization of the use of military force and we end our hot wars, when we have a transparent discussion about what our activities are in terms of drones and targeted killing, only at the point the nation decides to call itself at peace can diplomacy actually ascend to some kind of parity. unless and until we reach that moment, it is impossible, politically and institutionally to get there. >> at some point i want to talk about when they announce in the spring that the u.s. is going to transition to no longer being in the lead role in afghanistan when they make that announcement this spring. i want to talk to you about whether or not it's significant if they're going to rename the operation in afghanistan, whether operation enduring freedom. >> that's really interesting. >> t
the center of gravity will be with the war machine, will be with the war planners, will be with the pentagon. it is only when the nation views itself as being at peace that diplomacy can take some kind of equal footing. until we get to place where we do something as dramatic as repealing or refusing to reauthorize, the authorization of the use of military force and we end our hot wars, when we have a transparent discussion about what our activities are in terms of drones and targeted killing,...
47
47
Feb 8, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 47
favorite 0
quote 0
buckets of money in the private sector, including serving on the board of a major contractor with the pentagon. mr. gates gave speeches, lots of them, for which he was paid plenty. but when bob gates testified before the senate, the subject of his private sector earnings never came up. after five hours of non-confrontational questions, the committee volt ford him unanimously. and then when it went to the full senate they confirmed him 95-2. the nominee before, that remember this guy? donald rumsfeld, 2001. donald rumsfeld, of course, had made zillions in the private sector. he sat on the board of a company that was believed to have won a giant contract to help north korea build nuclear reactors. but when donald rumsfeld testified before the senate, they didn't ask about the stock that he held or his roles in international business. they didn't even ask about the north korean reactors. they recommended his nomination to the full senate where he was confirmed in another vote of 95-2. so if history has anything to say about it, then what's happening to chuck hagel right now is not at all normal.
buckets of money in the private sector, including serving on the board of a major contractor with the pentagon. mr. gates gave speeches, lots of them, for which he was paid plenty. but when bob gates testified before the senate, the subject of his private sector earnings never came up. after five hours of non-confrontational questions, the committee volt ford him unanimously. and then when it went to the full senate they confirmed him 95-2. the nominee before, that remember this guy? donald...
54
54
Feb 21, 2013
02/13
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 54
favorite 0
quote 0
bipartisan fashion stop sequestration before in the words of the secretary of defense destroys the pentagon. >> everybody hates this thing. but in addition to hating this thing and agreeing that it is a bad idea, it would be very bad for the country and we shouldn't do it, they also all agree that it's the other guy's fault. president obama held a press conference this week in which he said it was the republicans holding the country hostage. meanwhile, republicans have tried to make this a household word, obamaquester. john boehner really wanted to lay the sequester at the feet of the president, the obamaquester, they want you to call it. it might have worked if it were true. the daily beast uncovered this power point slide from a year and a half ago, using it to try to sell republicans on the sequester deal. this power point presentation boasting about all the ways that sequestration was good for republicans, and how they, republicans should vote for it because there was a lot to like, because it look, sets up a new sequestration process to cut spending across the board. we like that. vote
bipartisan fashion stop sequestration before in the words of the secretary of defense destroys the pentagon. >> everybody hates this thing. but in addition to hating this thing and agreeing that it is a bad idea, it would be very bad for the country and we shouldn't do it, they also all agree that it's the other guy's fault. president obama held a press conference this week in which he said it was the republicans holding the country hostage. meanwhile, republicans have tried to make this...